9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Challenge to the notice issued under the Agrl. I.T. Act, 1950 regarding the assessment of agricultural income. 2. Interpretation of Section 9(2)(a)(iv) of the Act in the context of including income from properties purchased in the names of minor sons for assessment purposes. Analysis: The petitioner, owning land planted with cardamom, sought to quash a notice issued under the Agrl. I.T. Act, 1950 by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer. The notice proposed to assess the petitioner's income by clubbing properties purchased in the names of his minor sons with his own income. The petitioner challenged this part of the notice, arguing that it was without jurisdiction. The key issue was whether the income from properties purchased in the names of minor sons could be included in the petitioner's total agricultural income for assessment under Section 9(2)(a)(iv) of the Act. The Court examined Section 9(2)(a)(iv) which allows inclusion of income from assets transferred to minor children without adequate consideration. However, it was established that the petitioner had not transferred any assets to his minor sons. Documents showed the properties were purchased in the names of the minors, and there was no indication of consideration provided by the petitioner. As the properties did not belong to the petitioner and there was no transfer of assets to the minors, Section 9(2)(a)(iv) did not apply. The Court concluded that the notice's second part, including the properties purchased in the names of the minors, violated statutory provisions and quashed it. In the final judgment, the Court allowed the petition, quashing the second part of the notice related to properties purchased in the names of the minors. It was clarified that the first part of the notice, regarding the non-acceptance of returns, was not challenged in the proceedings. No costs were awarded in this matter.
|
